There are no way Nintendo will make a big acquisition like Microsoft did with Bethesda, because it would make zero sense financially, it would cost them a lot of money, money they would never recover. Bethesda was not very successful with their games. Microsoft was willing to step in, absorb the losses, in order to boost their catalog of games for their subscription system, which is losing money too.

Nintendo's core business is videogames and they can't afford to lose money for the hope that they may get it back in 10 years. Nintendo profits are the biggest currently in the market and it shows that their strategy is the working perfectly.

Only Microsoft, the in-game area, can do this.

Neither Sony nor Nintendo. 

More accurate to say that Microsoft is the only one that can do this without it being a substantial risk for the company. 

yeah

Theoretically they could, but for that to happen, an investor majority would all need to agree on which studio to buy.
And this seems highly unlikely to happen.

Nintendo is more the "forge bonds through acquiring a substantial number of shares" type in recent years.
Occasionally they have bought out the rest of a studio they already co-owned, if the price was right, or the studio is somehow in financial danger. But these are exceptions.

The problem with gamers trying to say what corporations should spend their money on is that they don't understand business strategy. They see "Nintendo should buy Sega because it would be cool if Nintendo owned Sonic." That would cost Nintendo 350 billion yen. To put this into comparison, Breath of the Wild is Nintendo's most expensive project in the history of the company, and by quite a bit, at about 12.5 billion yen, so the cost of Nintendo to buy Sega, in other words, would be roughly 28 Breath of the Wilds, all because "It would be cool if Nintendo owned Sonic."

If some share holder is asking Nintendo to purchase companies like Sega, then he's some random dumbass and not representative of the shareholders at large. Considering Nintendo's big money makers are already owned by Nintendo, I can't see a merger or acquisition being in Nintendo's best interest creatively or financially.

All Nintendo needs to do is outsource any of their dormant IPs, and boom another exclusive for the Switch. Nintendo already has developers, and while more is never a bad thing, they don't really need to make that jump. Besides MS and Nintendo have been pretty buddy buddy lately, so I don't see how anything MS does is a direct shot at Nintendo anyway.

And let's not forget that Nintendo reaches some age groups that Sony and Microsoft do not reach with their consoles,that part of the market they have secured with the nature of most their ip's and the image of the Nintendo brand in general.

Funny because well over half of the Switch userbase tends to be over the age of 18, with the vast majority being 19-35.  That kind of speaks volumes about who their IPs really appeal to, with kids being in the minority.  Just because a game is acceptable for a kid to play =/= mean kids are the main demographic.  That kind of thought belongs in another thread that was made recently.

Besides most kids play Fortnite, Minecraft, sports games, or CoD in my experience.  All of which, can be played on other devices.

You are responding with something i always agreed with so i hope you are aware and are just adding on the information?

I DO think that children playing Nintendo games plays a big role in them still playing Nintendo games as an adult, and that's a good advantage.